Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome our guests. It is right to place the difficulties and the conflict we experienced in a historical context. The conflict did not just begin in 1968 or 1969 and it is important to consider from where it originated. It is also important to consider the position in other regions across the globe. Reference was made to a woman sitting in a particular seat on a bus in the US in the early 1960s. That woman could very easily have taken the decision to sit at the back of the bus. There are many people who would argue that perhaps it is right to keep one's head down and not say anything. This view is particularly prevalent among many officials who will say "Don't raise the issue because it will only add to the difficulties". Where there is institutionalised discrimination against people - different conflicts throughout the world were mentioned in this regard - individuals are going to rebel or argue or rise up against that discrimination. The Arab spring and other uprisings have shown this to be the case.

There are many present at this meeting who have grey hair. I find it difficult to come to terms with the fact that the Good Friday Agreement was signed 15 years ago or that it is 32 years since the hunger strikes. We have all experienced the emotion, pain, etc., relating to these events. For many young people, however, the slow pace of change is the major difficulty. That is the great frustration for all of us, even though we are 15 years down the line from the signing of the Agreement. Our guests referred to many of the issues. However, many of these have been parked or people have stated that they have been resolved. I am sure we all agree that ex-prisoners have a big role to play in the context of resolving the conflict, bringing their communities forward and so on. We established certain things in respect of former combatants and the matter was then parked and forgotten about because it was viewed as being resolved. We know, to our cost, that this is not the actual position.

Aspects of the Good Friday Agreement that have not been implemented have been identified. Is there an appetite for change in this regard? Reference was made to the civic forum. The example of a forum for discontent was put forward in this regard and perhaps it underlines one of the reasons some politicians did not want to go down that road. There is also the point that we represent civic society. In such circumstances, why would there be a need for such a forum? After all, elected representatives come from civic society. If one considers the many conflict resolution mechanisms used throughout the world, one will come across the widespread view to the effect that civic society must be involved. I am of the view that one of the weaknesses with the Good Friday Agreement is that we did not engage on this level. This matter remains outstanding.

I agree with the view that the Bill of Rights should be progressed but I again question whether there is the appetite in this regard. I also agree that the two Governments must be champions for change. Part of the problems arises as a result of the fact that both have taken a step back. Someone needs to take up the baton in respect of the civic forum and the many other outstanding matters relating to the Agreement in order to bring about change. There is a need for re-engagement in this area.

Our guests referred to the lack of change and the committee previously heard about an outbreak of rickets in west Belfast. It is 2013 yet such an outbreak has occurred. The position with regard to poverty has still not changed. Reference was also made to mixed housing. Given that there is not a huge housing programme, it would be difficult to ensure progress in this regard. On our recent visit to the city, people were discussing a particular complex in north Belfast. There was not a massive amount of funding for this complex but we all know about small seedlings.

On a day such as this it is important to discuss the huge changes we have witnessed in our lifetimes. In that context, a number of previous speakers referred to the disconnect, not only among young people. As others indicated, there is a disconnect between those who live in Protestant working class areas and Unionist politicians. There is also a disconnect between working class Catholics and republican and Nationalist politicians but not to the same extent. What can we do in respect of the disconnect to which I refer? Should unionism take up the running in this regard? Many of the meetings we attended recently were also attended by Unionist politicians and the same argument was put forward. What can the committee, the role of which relates to the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, do in respect of encouraging the change which must happen within society?

We must address the outstanding issues as a matter of urgency. In that context, however, questions will arise as to whether certain people will lose out.

Achieving equality will mean a loss, supposedly, for some in society. That mindset needs to be changed.

I welcome the work in which the guests are involved with those organisations and groups that are disconnected from the political system. What can we do in that respect? The guests spoke about some of the so-called dissident groups, some of the loyalist groups and so on. In that context, is there a role not only for mainstream politicians, but for a committee such as this one? What would the guests urge both Governments to do now? Would it be to take up the mantle of being a champion for change about which Mr. Peter Sheridan talked? What else can both Governments do? If the guests had a magic wand to bring about positive change tomorrow, what would they like both Governments to do?